DOCSLIB.ORG

Harappa Excavations 1986-1990 a Multidisciplinary Approach to Third Millennium Urbanism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Harappa Excavations 1986-1990 a Multidisciplinary Approach to Third Millennium Urbanism Harappa Excavations 1986-1990 A Multidisciplinary Approach to Third Millennium Urbanism Edited by Richard H. Meadow Monographs in World Archaeology No.3 •. PREHI STORY PRESS . Madison Wisconsin b 4 Urban Process in the Indus Tradition: A Preliminary Model from Harappa Jonathan Mark Kenoyer University of Wisconsin-Madison '; ;i I ~i ! :1 Excavations on two of the major mounds at Harappa have revealed traces of an early settlement, a transitional phase ofdevelopment, and several phases of full urban and post-urban occupation. Although there is acontinuity ofoccupation, evidence for settlement growth and changes in organization reveal a dynamic process ofcity devel­ opment. The segregation of specific crafts and occupations, the availibility of new and exotic raw materials, the I construction of massive perimeter walls and entrances, and the maintenance of civic structures provide a new perspective on the nature ofan Indus city. A preliminary model is presented for the development of Harappa as a I city in the wider context of the Indus Tradition. n studying the earliest urban settlements of South excavations at the important site of Harappa (District Asia, we do not have written documents that Sahiwal, Punjab, Pakistan: Figure 4.2). I describe the structural and social organization of a Major objectives in these recent excavations at city. Consequently, our understanding of the urban Harappa have been to collect data that were over­ process is often quite sketchy. The extensive archaeo­ looked in previous large scale horizontal excavations, 1 logical excavations of the large urban centers of specifically those data relating to the growth and Harappa and Mohenjo-daro (Figure 4.1), carried out dynamics of this early urban center. By combining the I in the 19205 and 19305, provided a remarkable new information with general observations from t: glimpse of a previously unknown civilization, but extensive horizontal exposures made in the past, it is I little was discovered about its origin, growth, and possible to better understand the location of Harappa, internal organization. Subsequent excavations at these why and how the settlement grew and expanded, and and other third millennium sites in the region have how the city was organized. I been undertaken to obtain additional details on the In this paper I present a brief summary of the find­ urban phenomenon of the Indus Tradition. ings from the first five years of the current excavations The observations and interpretations from these at Harappa and a preliminary model for conceptual­ excavations, however" have been based on general izing the growth of Harappa as a city. The value of impressions and, with a few exceptions, were not such a model is that it allows more specific compar­ supported by the publication of detailed stratigraphic isons within the Indus region and West Asia and sections, plans, or artifact distribution analyses. As a helps to define and direct future research. result, it is difficull to critically assess many of the initial interpretations. Because of these problems, new Harappa as Known from excavations are needed at all of the previously exca­ Previous Excavations vated sites. Through the cooperative agreement between the Government of Pakistan, Deparbnent of Prior to the current excavations at Harappa, major Archaeology and Museums, and the University of research at the site was conducted by M.S. Vats from California, Berkeley, it has been possible to open new 1926-1934 (1928-29, 1940), K.N. Shastri during the late 29 80 ~ C> / 38 ! + 4­ ~ ~ 36 I~ -\­ ~ t'T'J ~ 1\ 34 £ • ~ ,• ..... N • 6· • ;:s I • HlmlllYln Mil (I) • 32 I, Io-l -O- ".:.' . (.0 . 00 • 0"'1 f I ~~ Io-l ~ .. Sel,.. " ~_ (.0 .. <. ----------- -)J@ 1- .\~" (.0 .. S hahr.I-Sokhta~ c .. .. .. :,-~.......:;; .. .. Chilli' HIIII ; \ .... ,,' 6\ ...~:::. ~ ~ @J' ~ HIli , , 2 ~ ~ ,, " , , RI' ARABIAN SEA AI Junl yz Key: , Integration Era Site. • Other Important Site. ~ 100 100 200 300 400 500 MajOr Trade' Exchange Route. -- -- -- --­ Figure 4.1: Map showing major sites and interaction networks of the Indus Tradition, Integration Era, Harappan Phase. ~';:r L_~_ :.:.·~~J.~. '-·:~T,..... ~.~ _':' "'i,,, J:',.' ·,,-'::..·.·i,·,;.. .... ~... ::.: ~~~;.i1;:f~~:~,::~9;f~{i:~vtJ~~~..~~~~:~,.::%;,~}~4~~~*.~;:. / I" / ~ ~ N1800 N1800 ;:s ~ ti ~ ~ (I) (I) ::::c-. N1SOO N N1600 ~ - ~ ;:s""""'" ~ ;: (I) ~ N1400 t N1400 ~-. --.o .. ::::c ~ ~ N1200 ~ N1200 -§. ® ;:s-. ~ ""'t u.c. Berkeley Excavations: 1988-1990 N1000 Operation 1: cemetery ~ N1000 Operation 2: Mound AS ~ Operation 3: Mound E Previous Excavations r--;J ..__J o 100 200 met.,. ~ Ioo-ol Figure 4.2: Harappa 1990 site plan showing extent of excavations. 32 Harappa Excavations 1986-1990: A Multidisciplinary Approach 19305 (unpublished), R.E.M. Wheeler in 1946 (1947), general correlations were made on the basis of an and M.R. Mughal in 1966 (1968). In the context of this extensive knowledge of artifact types and careful presentation, it is important to summarize the impor­ observations of artifacts found in the major levels. In tant contributions and clarify the interpretations some contexts artifacts were carefully collected using presented by these earlier excavators. Other excava­ small excavation knives and sieves (Vats 1940:58). tions have been made at Harappa, but they are still Absolute levels of the strata were not considered as unpublished, and little is known about their results. particularly relevant, and in several contexts Vats (See Possehl, Chapter 2 in this volume.) (1940:135) emphasizes that, although walls or artifacts were found at low levels, they are in fact derived from M.S. Vats later periods. Vats also was concerned with the mixing of artifacts due to brick robber trenches and to the The first major excavations at Harappa were carried ancient Harappan practice of using older cultural out by M.S. Vats. He (and his superior officers) material as filling in floors, foundations, and plat­ proposed an internal chronology of the site based on forms. He paid careful attention to the mixing of his own work and the results of earlier small scale larger seals in strata that contained the tiny seals and excavations conducted in 1921-1925 by D.R. Sahni. sealings (Vats 1940:120). The classification of artifacts, internal chronology, and The overall relative chronology was based on absolute dating of Harappa were' all based on general general observations of specific artifact types that correlations with Mohenjo-daro, which was being came to be identified as chronological markers. These excavated simultaneously. Although the proposed artifacts included ceramics, figurines, and seal types. dates are no longer valid, the internal relative The most important in this discussion are the "tiny chronology that was proposed for Harappa is still seals and sealings" and terracotta toy figurines of important for comparative purposes (Table 4.1). archaic type, which were invariably found in the The overall chronology of the site was divided into lower levels of the excavations (Figure 4.3). In order to Early, Intermediate, and Late periods, and the major differentiate the "tiny seals and sealings" from actual levels or strata of discrete excavation units were corre­ intaglio seals and seal impressions, they here will be lated to these period designations. In this manner, referred to as "steatite and faience tokens." The stratum III from Mound F, Trench IV, was attributed steatite tokens are incised in positive while the faience to Late Period Ill, while stratum III from Area J was tokens are made in a mold or bear seal impressions. attributed to Intermediate I. Vats (1940:3) estimated that the site of Harappa Itis quite clear that Vats and his colleagues were not spread over an area some 3.5 miles "in circuit." If using a carefully structured systematic method for calculated as a square, this would enclose approxi­ establishing the relative chronology. Nevertheless, mately 198 hectares or as a circle, 252 hectares. Our Table 4.1. General stratigraphy adapted from Vats (1940:9-10).· Mohenjo-daro" Harappa MoundF MoundAB AreaJ AreaG CemeteryH Period Strata Strata Strata Strata Strata Late (2750-3050 Be) (2750-3050 Be) (2850-3050 Be) (2700-2800 Be) (2000-2500 Be) I I I(slightly later) I I I II II II II II II III III III (N) N Intermediate (3QSO-3SOO Be) (before 3050 Be) (before 3OSO Be) (32SOBe) I N V III III II V VI N III VI (N) . VII Early (1st 1/2 4th mil.) I VIII II III ·Dates are those quoted by Vats (1940:9-10). ·"'This periodization for Mohenjo-daro is based on Marshall (1931) but modifications were proposed by Mackay (1938:xiv). Urban Process in the Indus Tradition: A Preliminary Model from Harappa 33 ........ .. ' • _ I'... ... · -'... ..... :.": ,," "" : . ". ,. ",,' .. ~ ",J • .".. .. .'.- .: ... I . ... .. ... :" ,::-: 'f·"' ~f'::": '\. ~! .... &.-.." ; I A O~ ~ . •.···'. I '0. &D0'· • i\l A-." ~. B Iv ffH] c Figure 4.3: Harappa Figurines and Tokens: A. Examples of figurines with legs joined (from Vats 1940:Plate LXXIX, 61, 62, 63, 64); B. Examples of incised. steatite tokens, Harappa 1990, Period 3B; C. Examples of faience tokens, Harappa 1990, Period 3B. (See Figures 13.44 and 13.46 in this volume.) current estimate is that the site was at least 150 In all three of these trenches, Vats notes the presence hectares in area (Dales and Kenoyer 1989a). of steatite and faience tokens in the lower levels. In the Vats and his predecessors excavated in five major lowest levels he notes the presence of archaic terra­ areas: Mound F in the northwest; Mound AB, Area J, cotta bull figurines (Vats 1940: PI. LXXXIX, 62) (Figure and Area H (all to the south of Mound F); and Area G 4.3), which have the two front and two back legs on the southeastern perimeter of the mounded areas joined together. In later figurines all four legs are (Figure 4.2). Mound E and modem Harappa town separate. were examined, but no major excavations were On the basis of these artifacts and similarities in conducted in thoseareas.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Arthur M. Sackler Colloquium of the National Academy Of
    1 Arthur M. Sackler Colloquium of the National Academy of Sciences Early Cities: New Perspectives on Pre-Industrial Urbanism Final Revisions: Oct. 1, 2005 Indus Urbanism: New Perspectives on its Origin and Character Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison During the past two decades a variety of archaeological research projects focused on the Indus civilization have made it possible to refine earlier models regarding the origin and character of this distinctive urban society. Excavations at the major city of Harappa have revealed a long developmental sequence from its origins to its eventual decline and subsequent transformation. Recent excavations at the large urban centers of Dholavira and Rakhigarhi, along with reexamination of the largest city of Mohenjo-daro have shown that the development of urbanism was not uniform throughout the greater Indus region (Kenoyer 1998). Detailed studies within each city have revealed many shared characteristics as well as some unique features relating to the dynamic process of city growth and decline. In addition to the excavations of larger urban centers, regional surveys and extensive excavations at smaller settlements have provided a new perspective on the nature of interaction between large and small urban centers and even rural settlements. The increase in radiocarbon dates from well-documented contexts in stratigraphic excavations has helped to refine the chronology of settlements in both core areas and rural areas (Meadow and Kenoyer 2005b; Possehl 2002a; Possehl 2002c). On the basis of a more refined chronology and comparisons of the material culture, it appears that some rural settlements may have been directly linked to the major cities, while others appear to have had relatively little direct contact during some time periods (Meadow and Kenoyer 2005b).
    [Show full text]
  • NARTAMONGЖ 2013 Vol. Х, N 1, 2 F. R. ALLCHIN ARCHEOLOGICAL and LANGUAGE-HISTORICAL EVIDENCE for the MOVEMENT of INDO
    NARTAMONGÆ 2013 Vol. Х, N 1, 2 F. R. ALLCHIN ARCHEOLOGICAL AND LANGUAGE-HISTORICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE MOVEMENT OF INDO-ARYAN SPEAKING PEOPLES INTO SOUTH ASIA The present Symposium serves a useful purpose in focusing our attention upon the difficulties encountered in recognising the movements of peoples from archeological evidence. One of the reassuring aspects of the broad inter- national approach which is experienced in such a gathering is that it serves to show the common nature of the problems that confront us in trying to re- construct the movements of the Indo-Aryans and Iranians, whether in the South-Russian steppes or the steppes of Kazakhstan; the Caucasus or the southern parts of Middle Asia properly speaking; or in Iran, Afghanistan, Pa- kistan or India. Perhaps this is why there were recurrent themes in several pa- pers, and why echoes of what I was trying to express appeared also in the pa- pers of others, notably in those of B. A. Litvinsky and Y. Y. Kuzmina. In particular, there seems to be a need for a general hypothesis or model for these movements. Such a model must be inter-disciplinary, combining the more limited models derivable from archeological, historical, linguistic, anth- ropological and other categories of data. Strictly speaking, the several hypo- theses derived from each of these categories should first be formulated inde- pendently, and then as a second stage they should be systematically compared to one another. Only when there do not appear to be serious contradictions be- tween them should they be regarded as ready for incorporation into the general model.
    [Show full text]
  • ICONS and SIGNS from the ANCIENT HARAPPA Amelia Sparavigna ∗ Dipartimento Di Fisica, Politecnico Di Torino C.So Duca Degli Abruzzi 24, Torino, Italy
    ICONS AND SIGNS FROM THE ANCIENT HARAPPA Amelia Sparavigna ∗ Dipartimento di Fisica, Politecnico di Torino C.so Duca degli Abruzzi 24, Torino, Italy Abstract Written words probably developed independently at least in three places: Egypt, Mesopotamia and Harappa. In these densely populated areas, signs, icons and symbols were eventually used to create a writing system. It is interesting to see how sometimes remote populations are using the same icons and symbols. Here, we discuss examples and some results obtained by researchers investigating the signs of Harappan civilization. 1. Introduction The debate about where and when the written words were originated is still open. Probably, writing systems developed independently in at least three places, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Harappa. In places where an agricultural civilization flourished, the passage from the use of symbols to a true writing system was early accomplished. It means that, at certain period in some densely populated area, signs and symbols were eventually used to create a writing system, the more complex society requiring an increase in recording and communication media. Signs, symbols and icons were always used by human beings, when they started carving wood or cutting stones and painting caves. We find signs on drums, textiles and pottery, and on the body itself, with tattooing. To figure what symbols used the human population when it was mainly composed by small groups of hunter-gatherers, we could analyse the signs of Native Americans. Our intuition is able to understand many of these old signs, because they immediately represent the shapes of objects and animals. It is then quite natural that signs and icons, born among people in a certain region, turn out to be used by other remote populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Indus Civilization
    r- Provided for non-commercial research and educational use. Not for reproduction, distribution or commercial use. This article was originally published in the Encyclopedia ofArchaeology, pUblished by Elsevier, and the attached copy is provided by Elsevier for the autl'\or's benefit and for the benefit ofthe author's institution, for non­ commercial research and educational use including use in instruction at your institution, posting on a secure network (not accessible to the public) within your institution, and providing a copy to your institution's administrator. All other uses, reproduction and distribution, including without limitation commercial reprints, selling or licensing copies or a"ccess, or posting on open internet sites are prohibited. For exceptions, permission may be sought for such use through Elsevier's permissions site at: http://www.elsevier.comllocate/permisslonusematerial Kenoyer Jonathan Mark, Indus Civilization. In: Encyclopedia of Archaeology, ed. by Deborah M. Pearsall. @ 2008, Academic Press, New York. Author's personal copy ASIA, WESTnndus Civili~tion 715 Further Reading Pakistan, and is one of the earliest sites with evidence of farming (wheat and barley) and herding (cattle, sheep and goats) in South Allchin B (1997) The "fuse of Civilization in India and Pakistan. Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Great Bath The earliest public water tank in ancient South Asia Mishra S (1995) Chronology of the Indian stone age: the impact of is one of the most spectacular features of Mohenjo-daro. recent absolute and relative dating attempts. Man and Environ­lridus script (Harappan script) Refers to the undeciphered . ment XX(2): 11-16. writing system consisting of short strings of symbols found Misra VN (1989) Stone age India: An ecological perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • 3-Art-Of-Indus-Valley.Pdf
    Harappan civilization 2 Architecture 2 Drainage System 3 The planning of the residential houses were also meticulous. 4 Town Planning 4 Urban Culture 4 Occupation 5 Export import product of 5 Clothing 5 Important centres 6 Religious beliefs 6 Script 7 Authority and governance 7 Technology 8 Architecture Of Indus Valley Civilisation 9 The GAP 9 ARTS OF THE INDUS VALLEY 11 Stone Statues 12 MALE TORSO 12 Bust of a bearded priest 13 Male Dancer 14 Bronze Casting 14 DANCING GIRL 15 BULL 16 Terracotta 16 MOTHER GODDESS 17 Seals 18 Pashupati Seal 19 Copper tablets 19 Bull Seal 20 Pottery 21 PAINTED EARTHEN JAR 22 Beads and Ornaments 22 Toy Animal with moveable head 24 Page !1 of !26 Harappan civilization India has a continuous history covering a very long period. Evidence of neolithic habitation dating as far back as 7000 BC has been found in Mehrgarh in Baluchistan. However, the first notable civilization flourished in India around 2700 BC in the north western part of the Indian subcontinent, covering a large area. The civilization is referred to as the Harappan civilization. Most of the sites of this civilization developed on the banks of Indus, Ghaggar and its tributaries. Architecture The excavations at Harappa and Mohenjodaro and several other sites of the Indus Valley Civilisation revealed the existence of a very modern urban civilisation with expert town planning and engineering skills. The very advanced drainage system along with well planned roads and houses show that a sophisticated and highly evolved culture existed in India before the coming of the Aryans.
    [Show full text]
  • Indus Valley Civilization
    Name: edHelper Indus Valley Civilization A long, long time ago, there was a group of people called the Aryans. The Aryans were possibly from southern Russia and Central Asia. As nomads, they never liked to linger in one place. Instead, they much preferred to herd their animals by moving them from one spot to another. About 3,600 years ago, the Aryans decided to change their lifestyle. They wanted to give up endless wandering. They wanted to have a permanent settlement that they could call home. When they arrived in India, they did exactly that. As the Aryans learned to adapt to their new environment, they brought with them their religion and customs. Their culture later became the foundation of the Indian culture and led people to believe that it was India's oldest civilization. That notion changed completely in 1921! In 1921, archaeologists unearthed two ancient cities - Harappa and Mohenjo-daro - near the Indus River. Both sites predated the Aryans' settlement by about 1,000 years. The discovery, undoubtedly, was a surprise to everybody. Right away, it pushed the Indian history back even further than it already was. Scholars around the world termed the newly found culture "the Indus valley civilization." Some also called it "the Harappan civilization" because Harappa was the first city the archaeologists dug out. The Indus River lies on the western side of the Indian subcontinent. Today, both the river itself and the two ancient cities fall within the confines of Pakistan. The excavations indicated that people of this ancient culture were excellent city planners.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Proto-Iranians of Afghanistan As Initiators of Sakta Tantrism: on the Scythian/Saka Affiliation of the Dasas, Nuristanis and Magadhans
    Iranica Antiqua, vol. XXXVII, 2002 PRE-PROTO-IRANIANS OF AFGHANISTAN AS INITIATORS OF SAKTA TANTRISM: ON THE SCYTHIAN/SAKA AFFILIATION OF THE DASAS, NURISTANIS AND MAGADHANS BY Asko PARPOLA (Helsinki) 1. Introduction 1.1 Preliminary notice Professor C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky is a scholar striving at integrated understanding of wide-ranging historical processes, extending from Mesopotamia and Elam to Central Asia and the Indus Valley (cf. Lamberg- Karlovsky 1985; 1996) and even further, to the Altai. The present study has similar ambitions and deals with much the same area, although the approach is from the opposite direction, north to south. I am grateful to Dan Potts for the opportunity to present the paper in Karl's Festschrift. It extends and complements another recent essay of mine, ‘From the dialects of Old Indo-Aryan to Proto-Indo-Aryan and Proto-Iranian', to appear in a volume in the memory of Sir Harold Bailey (Parpola in press a). To com- pensate for that wider framework which otherwise would be missing here, the main conclusions are summarized (with some further elaboration) below in section 1.2. Some fundamental ideas elaborated here were presented for the first time in 1988 in a paper entitled ‘The coming of the Aryans to Iran and India and the cultural and ethnic identity of the Dasas’ (Parpola 1988). Briefly stated, I suggested that the fortresses of the inimical Dasas raided by ¤gvedic Aryans in the Indo-Iranian borderlands have an archaeological counterpart in the Bronze Age ‘temple-fort’ of Dashly-3 in northern Afghanistan, and that those fortresses were the venue of the autumnal festival of the protoform of Durga, the feline-escorted Hindu goddess of war and victory, who appears to be of ancient Near Eastern origin.
    [Show full text]
  • Arts of the Indus Valley
    2 ARTS OF THE INDUS VALLEY HE arts of the Indus Valley Civilisation emerged during Tthe second half of the third millennium BCE. The forms of art found from various sites of the civilisation include sculptures, seals, pottery, jewellery, terracotta figures, etc. The artists of that time surely had fine artistic sensibilities and a vivid imagination. Their delineation of human and animal figures was highly realistic in nature, since the anatomical details included in them were unique, and, in the case of terracotta art, the modelling of animal figures was done in an extremely careful manner. The two major sites of the Indus Valley Civilisation, along the Indus river—the cities of Harappa in the north and Mohenjodaro in the south—showcase one of earliest examples of civic planning. Other markers were houses, markets, storage facilities, offices, public baths, etc., arranged in a grid-like pattern. There was also a highly developed drainage system. While Harappa and Mohenjodaro are situated in Pakistan, the important sites excavated in India are Lothal and Dholavira in Gujarat, Rakhigarhi in Haryana, Bust of a bearded priest Ropar in Punjab, Kalibangan in Rajasthan, etc. Stone Statues Statues whether in stone, bronze or terracotta found in Harappan sites are not abundant, but refined. The stone statuaries found at Harappa and Mohenjodaro are excellent examples of handling three-dimensional volumes. In stone are two male figures—one is a torso in red sandstone and the other is a bust of a bearded man in soapstone—which are extensively discussed. The figure of the bearded man, interpreted as a priest, is draped in a shawl coming under the right arm and covering the left shoulder.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometric Knowledge of the Indus Civilization
    C 27 In Square Circle: Geometric Knowledge of the Indus Civilization Sitabhra Sinha∗, Nisha Yadav∗∗ and Mayank Vahia∗∗ *The Institute of Mathematical Sciences, CIT Campus, Taramani, Chennai 600 113, India. e-mail: [email protected] **Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400 005, India. 1 Introduction The geometric principles expounded in the Sulbasutras (800-500 BCE) have often been considered to mark the beginning of mathematics in the Indian subcontinent (Seidenberg, 1975; Staal, 2008). This collection of su- tras codify directions for constructing sacrificial fires, including rules for the complex configuration of ritual altars. The bird-shaped Agnicayan al- tar, consisting of five layers of two hundred bricks each, with the bricks being of square, rectangular or triangular shapes of various sizes, is con- sidered by F. Staal to signal the beginning of geometry proper in South Asia (Staal, 2008). It has been dated by him to about 1000 BCE as some of the mantras that are concerned with the consecration of bricks occur in the earliest Yajurveda Samhita, the Maitrayani. The absence of any 442 Math Unlimited recorded tradition of geometric knowledge predating these sutras have led some scholars to suggest a West Asian origin for the onset of mathematical thinking in India. However, the discovery of the archaeological remnants of the Indus Valley civilization in parts of Pakistan and northwestern India over the course of last century has revealed a culture having a sophisticated understanding of geometry which predated the Sulbasutras by more than a thousand years. It is difficult to ascertain whether there was any continu- ity between the geometry practised by the Indus civilization and that used by the later Vedic culture; however, it is not impossible that some of the earlier knowledge persisted among the local population and influenced the sulbakaras (authors of the Sulbasutras) of the first millennium BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • Autochthonous Aryans? the Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts
    Michael Witzel Harvard University Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts. INTRODUCTION §1. Terminology § 2. Texts § 3. Dates §4. Indo-Aryans in the RV §5. Irano-Aryans in the Avesta §6. The Indo-Iranians §7. An ''Aryan'' Race? §8. Immigration §9. Remembrance of immigration §10. Linguistic and cultural acculturation THE AUTOCHTHONOUS ARYAN THEORY § 11. The ''Aryan Invasion'' and the "Out of India" theories LANGUAGE §12. Vedic, Iranian and Indo-European §13. Absence of Indian influences in Indo-Iranian §14. Date of Indo-Aryan innovations §15. Absence of retroflexes in Iranian §16. Absence of 'Indian' words in Iranian §17. Indo-European words in Indo-Iranian; Indo-European archaisms vs. Indian innovations §18. Absence of Indian influence in Mitanni Indo-Aryan Summary: Linguistics CHRONOLOGY §19. Lack of agreement of the autochthonous theory with the historical evidence: dating of kings and teachers ARCHAEOLOGY __________________________________________ Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies 7-3 (EJVS) 2001(1-115) Autochthonous Aryans? 2 §20. Archaeology and texts §21. RV and the Indus civilization: horses and chariots §22. Absence of towns in the RV §23. Absence of wheat and rice in the RV §24. RV class society and the Indus civilization §25. The Sarasvatī and dating of the RV and the Bråhmaas §26. Harappan fire rituals? §27. Cultural continuity: pottery and the Indus script VEDIC TEXTS AND SCIENCE §28. The ''astronomical code of the RV'' §29. Astronomy: the equinoxes in ŚB §30. Astronomy: Jyotia Vedåga and the
    [Show full text]
  • Languages of Harappa
    •§ Michael Witzel Feb. 17, 2000 135 k The Languages of Harappa § 1. The riddle of the Indus script and language Each year, or as it seems, by now every other month, we see a new decipherment of the Indus script. Beyond G. Possehl's fifty-odd examples (Possehl 1996), there must be some dozens more, by now frequently found on the internet. However, as is well known, neither is the script itself well understood nor do we know on which language it is based and for which languages it has been used. In this paper, I am not going to add myself to the long list of failures of decipherment of the script. Instead, I think we should first prepare the ground for such undertaking by investigating the peculiarities of the script itself, a task that has not been carried systematically enough (Wells 1998). Secondly, we should take a much closer look at the various sources which may indicate which languages were spoken in the core areas of the Indus civilization, in the Greater Panjab and in Sindh-Baluchistan. During the past few decades, the language underlying the Indus script has almost universally been taken as Proto-Dravidian (leaving aside such unlikely explanations as Sanskrit, Sumerian, etc., see Possehl 1996). This means a form of reconstructed, early Dravidian that precedes --by some two thousand years or more-- that of the Sangam (Cakam) texts which were composed in archaic Tamil around the beginning of our era. The tacit presupposition has been that the by and large South Indian Dravidian languages preceded the various dialects of Old Indo-Aryan (OIA) in the Panjab and Sindh.
    [Show full text]
  • Dholavira 'Prime-Ratio' of Indus Valley Civilization
    Dholavira ‘prime ratio’ of Indus valley civilization In my last blog post, I discussed the “divine ratio” and this time around it is about another amazing ratio - the “Dholavira prime ratio”. It belonged to the ancient Indus valley civilization and was discovered in our own backyard, Dholavira in Kutch, in the state of Gujarat. The Indus valley civilization, which dates back to 4000 BC, was a Bronze Age civilization that thrived in the basins of the river Indus, across Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. Its matured phase, however, flourished during the period circa 2600 to 1900 BC and is revealed in the famous cites of Harappa, Mohenjo-Daro (Pakistan) and in Dholavira, Lothal and Juni Kuran in India. Dholavira ‘prime ratio’ The ancient site at Dholavira lies in the island of Khadir in Bhachau, Kutch, in Gujarat. The island is one of the three prominent landmarks, the Bela, Khadir and Paccham bet islands, surrounded by the salt waste of the Great Rann of Kutch and known for their unique geologic significance. Incidentally, I led the ONGC gravity-magnetic survey party to Kutch, in 1962, which camped in Bachau. As an observer, I did a ‘parikrama’ of the site by moving around the three islands, recording gravity and magnetic data, but had no inkling then of the great buried site, till Dholavira was discovered in 1967-68 and excavated in 1990, unraveling the marvels of the amazing civilization. Dholavira city is unique with the buildings built of stone, whereas most other Indus civilization sites including Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro cities are almost exclusively built of brick.
    [Show full text]